MKC: With Manziel's upside uncertain, Browns will look at all QB options

[JSS2306]

There's no hiding in this league on a professional level. Everybody knows what he is and that includes Marvin who went so far as to make a joke about him before his first snap. You don't see that kind of rhetoric with other rookies...

Jimmy's got to take a step back. This ain't the petrol business.

 

[EdMonix11]

There's not much you can do with a QB when he just looks utterly scared out there and is equally overmatched.

 

[MoGottiFor3]

What bothers me the most is that the FO paid all that money to scout QB's and they came up with the conclusion that Bridgewater was the best guy in the draft and we still drafted Manziel probably because Jimmy Haslam had a lot of influence on it, Browns gonna Brown.

How ever there's no turning back now, 5 quarters of watching Manziel play in a new playbook that was installed in week 15 is not proper evaluation and anyone who thinks so is an idiot because nobody has any idea right now.

Next year Manziel should be the starter and if he doesn't work out then we gotta hope that in the 2015 draft we'll have better luck.

 

[Phills14]

What bothers me the most is that the FO paid all that money to scout QB's and they came up with the conclusion that Bridgewater was the best guy in the draft and we still drafted Manziel probably because Jimmy Haslam had a lot of influence on it, Browns gonna Brown.

How ever there's no turning back now, 5 quarters of watching Manziel play in a new playbook that was installed in week 15 is not proper evaluation and anyone who thinks so is an idiot because nobody has any idea right now.

Next year Manziel should be the starter and if he doesn't work out then we gotta hope that in the 2015 draft we'll have better luck.

In most circumstances I would agree 100% with you. However; for those of us who wouldn't have drafted Manziel in the 1st 5 rounds, 5 quarters is 5 too many to evaluate him. The 5 quarters of train wreck football, pun intended, only solidified every concern we ever had about the kid.

Can he improve? Sure. Will he improve so much that he's an effective QB in the NFL? I have an incredible amount of doubt about that.

 

[Soda]

What bothers me the most is that the FO paid all that money to scout QB's and they came up with the conclusion that Bridgewater was the best guy in the draft and we still drafted Manziel probably because Jimmy Haslam had a lot of influence on it, Browns gonna Brown.

How ever there's no turning back now, 5 quarters of watching Manziel play in a new playbook that was installed in week 15 is not proper evaluation and anyone who thinks so is an idiot because nobody has any idea right now.

Next year Manziel should be the starter and if he doesn't work out then we gotta hope that in the 2015 draft we'll have better luck.

1) If Manziel starts next season, it'll be the 2016 draft you're looking for better luck in.

2) The bolded is still pure conjecture. Who put that out there? LaCanfora?

Not to pick apart the post, but I can't just stomach when posters pull news scoops that fit their narrative and use them as basis for then calling someone else dumb...

 

[AZ_]

1) If Manziel starts next season, it'll be the 2016 draft you're looking for better luck in.

2) The bolded is still pure conjecture. Who put that out there? LaCanfora?

Not to pick apart the post, but I can't just stomach when posters pull news scoops that fit their narrative and use them as basis for then calling someone else dumb...

Sal Paolantonio of ESPN

But the study was commissioned under Banner.

Not sure why we're considering this "conjecture," though.

 

[Soda]

Sal Paolantonio of ESPN

But the study was commissioned under Banner.

Not sure why we're considering this "conjecture," though.

Well, can you verify truth? Do we know about said study? About the results when it's not comparing Teddy to Johnny?

I'm not getting into this debate with you again, though. If you believe the whole story, that's fine. I'm not taking it as more support for the Browns gonna Browns rhetoric, though. People believe what their narrative tells them; I'm trying not to fall victim to a person's opinion/conjecture.

 

[AZ_]

Well, can you verify truth? Do we know about said study? About the results when it's not comparing Teddy to Johnny?

I'm not getting into this debate with you again, though. If you believe the whole story, that's fine. I'm not taking it as more support for the Browns gonna Browns rhetoric, though. People believe what their narrative tells them; I'm trying not to fall victim to a person's opinion/conjecture.

How can we verify anything, really?

Isn't it all conjecture?

 

[Binkster]

This really has me worried, I'll be honest.

This is Charlie Frye level bad quarterbacking. He has manufactured 10 points this year - one touchdown against a prevent defense, one field goal on a drive saved by an unnecessary roughness penalty.

29 total rushing yards? 2 picks, a fumble, another that should have been a fumble recovered for a touchdown.

5. Yards. Per. Attempt. Yikes.

 

[Soda]

How can we verify anything, really?

Isn't it all conjecture?

Instead of answering my response to your question, you come with the snark?

Dude, grow up.

 

[AZ_]

Instead of answering my response to your question, you come with the snark?

Dude, grow up.

You're insufferable.

I'm in no way trying to be serious.

What possible answer would satisfy you, it was reported on by a reliable media member. You can choose not to believe it, you can call it conjecture.

I chose to take it at face value, you've chosen this particular report to take a stand against conjecture in the media. I'm simply asking where is the line, which reports should we believe and what should we label as conjecture?

I don't know why, but I'd imagine it has something to do with not fitting a narrative.

 

[Soar]

Manziel plays QB like I played Madden growing up.

Take the snap, run around like a jackass, make stupid throws or run for yards.

It worked in Madden. Not so much in real life.

 

[Soda]

We take old Sal's report as "face value" of Browns ineptitude; however, scoff at reports of good weeks of practice, toss this out the window http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2014/05/cleveland_browns_ray_farmer_sa.html and just go with what fits the puzzle you've built for yourself.

So, I'm still trying to figure out where that line is drawn, myself. Which one is it? Insufferable?

 

[AZ_]

We take old Sal's report as "face value" of Browns ineptitude; however, scoff at reports of good weeks of practice, toss this out the window http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2014/05/cleveland_browns_ray_farmer_sa.html and just go with what fits the puzzle you've built for yourself.

So, I'm still trying to figure out where that line is drawn, myself. Which one is it? Insufferable?

You're creating a false premise that ESPNs report is somehow a slight at the Browns organization.

It was spun as an outside the box idea that shows they're going the extra mile to address the most important position in football.

Per PFT:

According to Sal Paolantonio of ESPN, the Browns commissioned a study of the quarterback position that cost $100,000 and entailed a great deal of research into which qualities go into success at the most important position in football.

You're confusing two different points of view entirely.

Sal Pal is a JOURNALIST who has a certain level of ethics and credibility on the line when he creates a story such as this.

Mike Pettine is a COACH who's first responsibility is to the players and not throwing them under the bus to journalists.


If you can't decipher the difference in the two points of view, then you'll never figure out where the line is.

 

[Phills14]

Can you 2 cut it out already? Seriously, this back and forth is pointless. The ignore feature is wonderful, use it.